When Is a Change Significant? The Update Problem of Apps in Medical and Behavioral Research

1Citations
Citations of this article
8Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Digital applications (apps) are commonly used across the research ecosystem. While apps are frequently updated in the course of clinical and behavioral research, there is limited guidance as to when an app update should trigger action related to human research participant protections and who should be responsible for monitoring and reviewing these updates. We term this the “update problem” and argue that, while it is the principal investigator's duty to track all relevant updates, the level of involvement and re-review by the institutional review board (IRB) of an approved research protocol should vary depending on whether the update may be classified as minor, not minor, or significant. Minor updates require at most annual notification of the IRB, updates that are not minor require prompt notification of the IRB, and significant updates may require full board re-review or another response. We also suggest how these policies might be implemented.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Shachar, C., Gerke, S., Morrell, W., Kirby, A., Cohen, I. G., & Bierer, B. E. (2022). When Is a Change Significant? The Update Problem of Apps in Medical and Behavioral Research. Ethics and Human Research, 44(3), 2–11. https://doi.org/10.1002/eahr.500118

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free